Just bought THE ANIMATOR'S SURVIVAL KIT
Vicho Friedli
ANIMATOR'S SURVIVAL KIT" by Richard Williams and "THE ANIMATOR'S
WORKBOOK" by Tony White.
I've just got to page 79 of Williams' book and finished browsing it till
the end. This is an AMAZING book. I am really happy I got it. It has
already answered all the questions I had about animation (or at least I
know the answer is in there).
I'm now going to check out Tony White's book.
Just wanted to share ;)
Cheers.
Warewolf
@news1.nivel5.cl:
> On december 23 & 24 I went to Miami and got a hold of the books "THE
> ANIMATOR'S SURVIVAL KIT" by Richard Williams and "THE ANIMATOR'S
> WORKBOOK" by Tony White.
>
> I've just got to page 79 of Williams' book and finished browsing it
till
> the end. This is an AMAZING book. I am really happy I got it. It has
> already answered all the questions I had about animation (or at least I
> know the answer is in there).
It sounds like I'll be keeping an eye out for them. :)
Thank you for the recommendations.
In fact, if you wouldn't mind, I'd like to add two more titles to your
list...
'Understanding Comics'
and, in some ways,
'Reinventing Comics'
both of which were written and illustrated by Scott McCloud (although I
found certain chapters of the latter to be too 'talkative' for my tastes)
Although they cover a different medium, I found his philosophies on
pacing and storytelling (and, in particular, his definition of 'Art') to
be *very* enlightening. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if these ideas
were able to enhance (or, in some cases, salvage) the projects they were
applied to.
At the very least, please, give it a thumb-through. If a presentation on
the persistence (and 'failure') of budding artists can hook a stickler
like me, some other section may stir you to purchase one or both volumes.
> Just wanted to share ;)
Well, thank you for sharing them, Vicho.
In fact, would anyone else like to educate this group on the 'brain
food' that is available?
Signed,
Warewolf
who may be giving Will Eisner's textbooks a try as well
Vicho Friedli
those books anytime soon. I don't live in the states and those books
rarely get here.
But I'll keep an eye for them anyway. :)
Vicho Friedli
think this word is horribly spelled) enough to be very good. Anyway,
this opinion is only after a quick browse, maybe after reading it
completely I change my mind.
(I bought it because it was recommended at the Barnes $ Noble website,
so maybe after reading it carefully I will find its "good things")
Vicho Friedli
know the english title) and "Anatomy for the Artist" by Sarah Simblet.
Samantha, the Indigo Hat
the standards. :)
Happy reading! :)
In article <cqqi7b$12h$1...@news1.nivel5.cl>,
Vicho Friedli
Thanks
Chris Sobieniak
(Vicho Friedli) wrote:
>Yes, I already had that one.
>Thanks
I assume the book you have is perhaps titled "Cartoon Animation".
This essentially is a deluxe edition that was put out by Walter Foster
Publishing in the mid '90s that combined both books that Blair had put
out previously ("Animation" and "How to Animate Film Cartoons") into one
entire volume (with a few more extras).
The Preston Blair books have been looked upon by many animators as the
best place to start with in drawing and learning the basics of
animation. Richard Williams' "The Animator's Survival Kit" is the step
above where Blair leaves off with it's extreme and advance look at
movement itself, and it's use in gestures, dialogue and other elements.
Tony White's book is still quite good, and probably a little easier to
get into than Richard's, though White himself had been involved in
assisting Williams on animating "A Christmas Carol", for which won
Williams an Oscar for best animated short (technically a TV special).
This book is quite easy to find, I still see a copy or two at a nearby
Barnes & Noble.
Given the importances of anatomy books and all (I have the massive
"Anatomy for the Artist" by Jeno Bascay[?]), a set of books that
shouldn't be overlooked are Eadweard Muybridge's "The Human Figure in
Motion" and "Animals in Motion", published by Dover Publications. These
books have been very essential for many animators in nailing down the
proper movment in their work.
There's also a number of reference books and other guides out there that
I could recommend as well. One book that exposes the theorys of the
animation behind the classic Disney films is Frank & Ollie's "The
Illusion of Life: Disney Animation", which should still be available.
Many look to this as an excellent bible of Disney's traditional
animation. Then there's Shamus Culhane's "Animatoin from Script to
Screen", detailng every aspect of animation including writing,
recording, dialogue, even how to manage a studio of one's own.
There's also been a number of specialized books on certain elements of
animation. Christopher Hart has done a book detailing the basics of
animation drawing for design and layouts, Don Bluth has just put out one
for storyboard, and a few others.
From the Master of Car-too-nal Knowledge...
Christopher M. Sobieniak
--"Fightin' the Frizzies since 1978"--
Vicho Friedli
I looked for the Disney book also when I was in Miami, but it wasn't in
stock.
Are Eadweard Muybridge's "The Human Figure in Motion" and "Animals in
Motion" those books with pictures of every step of the movement? I saw
those when I was a kid and have never seen them since. I though they
would be useful. Now you confirmed it.
Mike Donovan
>"Anatomy for the Artist" by Jeno Bascay[?]),
Barcsay. I have it too. The thing I don't like about it is that it focuses
almost eclusively on male anatomy, with only 2 or 3 pages devoted to females.
Mike Donovan
Vicho Friedli
I have "Anatomy for the Artist" by Sarah Simblet. Does anybody else have
it? If yes, what do you think about it?
Chris Sobieniak
(Vicho Friedli) wrote:
>Wow! It looks like you really are the "Master of
>Car-too-nal Knowledge".
I know!
>I looked for the Disney book also when I was in
>Miami, but it wasn't in stock.
If they didn't have it.
>Are Eadweard Muybridge's "The Human Figure in
>Motion" and "Animals in Motion" those books with
>pictures of every step of the movement?
Yep!
>I saw those when I was a kid and have never seen
>them since. I though they would be useful. Now
>you confirmed it.
At least they're available on Amazon! You can also get them used on
eBay as well.
Though one time I had to laugh at seeing one of those books on eBay as
the guy who was selling it didn't seem to know a whole deal about the
use or significance of said books, and stated in his eBay description
that these books had "gay photos" or insisting they would be perfect for
those gay individuals to see. I thought it was wrong, but I guess some
people do get off on seeing a bunch of men doing things in the buff (or
wearing those primitive jock straps). :-)
Chris Sobieniak
(Mike Donovan) wrote:
>>Given the importances of anatomy books and all
>>(I have the massive "Anatomy for the Artist" by
>>Jeno Bascay[?]),
>Barcsay. I have it too.
Cool! My copy is the hardcover edition that was put out by Metrobooks
or whatever I found it at while at Barnes & Noble (their edition was a
paperback and was a bit expensive over the other).
>The thing I don't like about it is that it focuses
>almost eclusively on male anatomy, with only 2 or
>3 pages devoted to females.
>Mike Donovan
Somehow I didn't noticed. Perhaps there wasn't too many Hungarian women
back then who would bare all for the sake of art. :-)
S.t.A.n.L.e.E
"... doesn't want to draw some guy's butt...." ;)
Laters. =)
STan
--
_______ ________ _______ ____ ___ ___ ______ ______
| __|__ __| _ | \ | | | | _____| _____|
|__ | | | | _ | |\ | |___| ____|| ____|
|_______| |__| |__| |__|___| \ ___|_______|______|______|
__| | ( )
/ _ | |/ LostRune+sig [at] UofR [dot] net
| ( _| | http://www.uofr.net/~lostrune/
\ ______| _______ ____ ___
/ \ / \ | _ | \ | |
/ \/ \| _ | |\ |
/___/\/\___|__| |__|___| \ ___|
Samantha, the Chocolate Albatross
Chris Sobieniak <chrism...@webtv.net> wrote:
>On Mon, Jan 3, 2005, 10:49pm (EST+5), donovan...@aol.com
>(Mike Donovan) wrote:
>>>Given the importances of anatomy books and all
>>>(I have the massive "Anatomy for the Artist" by
>>>Jeno Bascay[?]),
>>Barcsay. I have it too.
>
>Cool! My copy is the hardcover edition that was put out by Metrobooks
>or whatever I found it at while at Barnes & Noble (their edition was a
>paperback and was a bit expensive over the other).
>
>>The thing I don't like about it is that it focuses
>>almost eclusively on male anatomy, with only 2 or
>>3 pages devoted to females.
>>Mike Donovan
>
>Somehow I didn't noticed. Perhaps there wasn't too many Hungarian women
>back then who would bare all for the sake of art. :-)
Nah. More to do with the belief of the time that the male body was more
dynamic. Women are only good for lounging around the house, you know.
We're not supposed to have well-defined muscles and the like.
Anyhow, the muscles in men and women are the same, it's just the distribution
and fat put over them that's different, and some rather minor shape
differences in the skeleton. (broader hips versus broader shoulders)
There are also no pictures of fat men in those drawing books. The idea is
that you're studying the muscle structure and putting various types of fat
over that is no different from clothing.
Chris Sobieniak
(Samantha, the Chocolate Albatross) wrote:
>In article
><6010-41D...@storefull-3134.bay.webtv.n>et>, Chris Sobieniak
<chrism...@webtv.net>
>wrote:
>>too many Hungarian women back then who would
>>bare all for the sake of art. :-)
>Nah. More to do with the belief of the time that the
>male body was more dynamic. Women are only
>good for lounging around the house, you know.
>We're not supposed to have well-defined muscles
>and the like.
D'oh! Didn't think of that!
>Anyhow, the muscles in men and women are the
>same, it's just the distribution and fat put over
>them that's different, and some rather minor shape
>differences in the skeleton. (broader hips versus
>broader shoulders). There are also no pictures of
>fat men in those drawing books. The idea is that
>you're studying the muscle structure and putting
>various types of fat over that is no different from
>clothing.
Reminded of being told by a friend of mine that the best model to draw
from is a thin and weak individual like some homeless person on the
streets, as that provides some good use of studying the skeletal
structure than if the person was physically fit.
ANIM8Rfsk
<< Reminded of being told by a friend of mine that the best model to draw
from is a thin and weak individual like some homeless person on the
streets, as that provides some good use of studying the skeletal
structure than if the person was physically fit. >>
Sigh. That's what they did at FOX. The live drawing models were apparently
homeless, smelled bad, and were painfully thin. I guess that's what you get
for $10.
Chris Sobieniak
Heh, if it's cheap labor I'm all for that! :)
But yeah, that's very ironic but effective.
Mike Donovan
I wrote:
>>>The thing I don't like about it is that it focuses
>>>almost eclusively on male anatomy, with only 2 or
>>>3 pages devoted to females.
>>>Mike Donovan
>>
>>Somehow I didn't noticed. Perhaps there wasn't too many Hungarian women
>>back then who would bare all for the sake of art. :-)
>
>Nah. More to do with the belief of the time that the male body was more
>dynamic. Women are only good for lounging around the house, you know.
>We're not supposed to have well-defined muscles and the like.
>
>Anyhow, the muscles in men and women are the same, it's just the distribution
>and fat put over them that's different, and some rather minor shape
>differences in the skeleton. (broader hips versus broader shoulders)
>There are also no pictures of fat men in those drawing books. The idea is
>that you're studying the muscle structure and putting various types of fat
>over that is no different from clothing.
They may be the same, but they are shaped differently, partly because the bones
are shaped differnetly. Women and men move differently too.
That said, I must confess that artistic accuracy wasn't my only concern when it
came to showing how to draw bodies in that book:)
Mike Donovan